May 2, 2013
Battle Between Tragedy and Human Perfection
Thinking deeply about Shakespeare’s The Tragedy of King Richard the Second and the situation that occurred between King Richard, Henry Bolingbroke and the commoners. I felt there was a correspondence of human nature and political reality in line with Immanuel Kant’s views on freedom of will. “Human actions, like every other natural event are determined by universal laws.” But every man has his-own-story, which defines life through a different perspective and unpredictable factors, in relation to events that occur during his time. In Shakespeare’s writing he refers to kingship as a dominant role played by a young man who has not yet majestically matured to fully understand the responsibility of being king, maintaining control of his people, and distribution of wealthy land. I felt that Richard’s actions were based off the effects of what he thought a king with authority should have the right to do without being overthrown. At the same time it didn’t seem as though he had much guidance to properly mold him into being king, he did what every youthful man would do be generous with a bit of vengeance. In contrast to Kant’s “Sixth Thesis” he writes that the human being is an animal who requires a master because without a master he is liable to abuse his freedom and impose his will on others….” King Richard had no one to obey once he lost his uncle he took it upon himself to change the nature of his power and wealth. Taking it to another level causing his people to turn against him because of the choices that were being made became detrimental to his image as a king. After spitefully inheriting what was to be his cousin Henry Bolingbroke’s inheritance of English land from his late father. Started a new conflict because at that point, the respect and honor to one man was being tarnished.
That proved his greed and after such a vain attempt he got shut out rightfully, because he was trying to antagonize Bolingbroke with his kingship and imposed on the commoners by taxing them to support his conflicts of interest. “The friction among men, the inevitable antagonism, which is a mark of even the largest societies and political bodies, is used by nature as a means to establish a condition of quiet and security (Kant 180).” Once Bolingbroke assembled his plan of stopping Richard II in this tracks apparently, got commoners and Richard’s allies to join forces with him. After all the unwise decisions and terrible management of the country, everyone grew tired of inconsideration from the man they called king.
At this point I saw how Richard II built himself up for failure because his approach to such a responsible and noble job from the beginning was just out of control. He began making history in